"Shooting Down Gun Lobby Myths" by Greg Mitchell

Important NYT editorial up tonight takes on the embrace by lazy lawmakers of the myths promoted by gun nuts, particularly about how the ban on assault weapons "did not help." Of course, the ban was allowed to lapse partly due to such propaganda. The Times provides ample evidence to the contrary. "The false statistics comfort members of Congress who fear the gun lobby or their more conservative constituents, or both, and are blocking a new and stronger ban on assault weapons proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein." Just a sample of the facts:

The information is there if Congress is interested. After the ban expired, 37 percent of police departments reported noticeable increases in criminals’ use of assault weapons, according to a 2010 report by the Police Executive Research Forum.

In Virginia, the number of guns with high capacity magazines seized by police dropped after they were included in the 1994 weapons ban, but then rebounded sharply after the ban expired, according to a 2011 study by The Washington Post. Maryland enacted its own more stringent ban on assault weapons ban in 1994, and a 55 percent drop in assault pistols from crime scenes was reported by the Baltimore police.

3. ONLY if they agree with your position

4. Considering that the 1994 AWB didn't actually ban anything, then how did it do anything?

It didn't ban any guns. The manufacturers had work-arounds ready before the ban became law. The banned guns continued to be made, but with the work-arounds, sometimes under new names. The classic example is the TEC-9. The maker stopped putting a barrel shroud on and renamed it the AB-10. (AB = After Ban)

There was enough lead time that the magazine makers ran shifts 24/7 turning out magazines so that there were plenty of hi-capacity magazines during the entire ban period.

And the AWB stimulated interest in those type of guns so that sales skyrocketed, and remain high.

Since the AWB didn't ban anything, it is impossible for it to have had any effect on crime.

5. Well

"After the ban expired, 37 percent of police departments reported noticeable increases in criminals’ use of assault weapons, according to a 2010 report by the Police Executive Research Forum."

What does that even mean, "noticeable increase"? If you had one assault weapon use one year, and two the next, that would be a 100% increase. Quite "noticeable", but meaning little in the grand scheme of things. Without some hard numbers and some context of how they stack up against other gun crime, this statement is meaningless.

"In Virginia, the number of guns with high capacity magazines seized by police dropped after they were included in the 1994 weapons ban, but then rebounded sharply after the ban expired, according to a 2011 study by The Washington Post. Maryland enacted its own more stringent ban on assault weapons ban in 1994, and a 55 percent drop in assault pistols from crime scenes was reported by the Baltimore police.

First off...assault pistol? Really? WTF is that? And again, there's no hard numbers for context here. As far as the fall and rise of "high capacity magazines" seized, there's still no statistical correlation demonstrated between them and the rate or severity of gun crimes, so what is all this proving as far as real world results go?